I wrote a draft a couple of months ago, put it aside for a while, then self-crit it and edited it down to a second draft recently. I’ve already gotten one review, which was positive, so this is potentially a final pass.

I wanted to create a vague sense of menace or intrigue that some unknown entity could be conceiving [quasi-fictitious] offspring through the erotic fiction, whilst keeping it ambiguous and peripheral to the focus of the article; I wanted broad, implied cosmic horror in the background, with the focus being the more tangible psychological horror or tragedy of the authors’ lives being affected.

Do you think that’s a worthwhile objective, and, if so, do you think the draft achieves it? Is it sufficiently original and interesting? Does it need something more, or is it good as is?

Allow me to preface this by saying that I tend to address the first instance of any recurring errors. To elaborate, if I see something off and it comes up again at a different point, I am less likely to comment on it a second time. Keep this in mind as we go further.

This is a bit awkward to read for some reason? It's probably fine, honestly, but a phrase I like to use is "memory conditioning". Maybe you could find use for it, too, but this is a small criticism that is based solely on my opinion, so take it as you will.

SCP-XXXX is a fictitious female character, the appearance and personality of whom are consistently portrayed by each of her authors independently.

The articles are sometimes published on the internet, or circulated in physical format amongst a peer group, and sometimes simply saved as a digital document, or written on paper and kept by the author.

This statement is a bit all over the place, likely due to the use of "and" "or" and "sometimes". I suggest taking some time to tidy this sentence.

This has resulted in affected authors leaving their partners and children so as to be alone with their beloved creation.

The tone gets a bit shaky here, going from impartial to descriptive. Easy remedy for this sentence in particular is to drop "beloved".

I just looked over at your collapsible after the read (as per your instructions) and I'm not certain that you convey that clearly here. I do think the concept itself is solid. A fictitious succubus is a great concept. However, I think the article is just a bit short now. You have your hooks in place and I'm taking them, but there isn't a whole lot of payoff as it is.

My suggestion: expand on the article. Maybe firsthand interviews with those affected by the anomaly or (if you want to really earn that 'sexual' tag) detail some of the works they appear in.

I think I prefer ‘amnestically rehabilitated’ in this instance though, as it has more positive connotation than ‘memory conditioning’, but I’ll give it some more thought.

Oh bother, I was trying to convince myself that I should keep it concise and didn’t need to tackle an interview log for this one. Writing dialogue is a weak area for me. I have some ideas involving the offspring of the authors and the anomaly, but I was hoping that it wouldn’t be necessary to go into that in this article, and it would stand on it own. I’ll consider your advice and get back to the draft. Thanks again.